Anthony case: Prosecution motion for evidence to remain sealed ok'd by Strickland

Posted: 5:47 pm EST February 3, 2010
Updated: 5:59 pm EST February 3, 2010

ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- In the case against Casey Anthony Wednesday, prosecutors revealed they want to meet with Judge Stan Strickland privately to get his permission to hold back information from the defense.
Repeatedly, the defense has asked for more information from federal investigators before moving their case forward, but it's unclear whether that's the evidence at issue.
Prosecutors also argued that, if the defense questions every material witness under oath, Casey's trial won't start before May of 2011.

MAY OF 2011 !?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

This is very interesting...I wonder what this evidence it?
Fingerprints? DNA? Soil from the backyard? I can't wait until May of 2011 for this trial!!

ORLANDO, Fla. --

Lawyers in the trial of Casey Anthony have filed two new motions.
In what defense lawyers are calling a rare request, prosecutors have asked to meet behind closed doors with Judge Stan Strickland.
In the motion, the assistant state attorney said the team wants more time to go over new materials and information that has come into the hands of law enforcement. Prosecutors said they want to meet with the judge and ask to delay turning that information over to the defense.
Attorney Richard Hornsby said the state needs to determine how the materials affect the murder case against Anthony. If the information is coming from a new witness, he said the state needs more time to prevent the defense from discrediting or scaring away that person from testifying.
Lawyers have also filed a timeline for the case, which may push the trial back to May 2011. Under the timeline, prosecutors must depose their witnesses by the end of August, while the defense has until Halloween to list who it will call as witnesses.
The defense will have until January to depose their witnesses. Lawyers must also show why the case is being delayed if the deadlines can't be met.
As of Wednesday, Anthony has been in jail for 421 days.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

New materials?? What could that be?

Casey Case Prosecutors Want To Withhold Info

ORANGE COUNTY, Fla. -- In the case against Casey Anthony Wednesday, prosecutors revealed they want to meet with Judge Stan Strickland privately to get his permission to hold back information from the defense.

Repeatedly, the defense has asked for more information from federal investigators before moving their case forward, but it's unclear whether that's the evidence at issue.

Prosecutors also argued that, if the defense questions every material witness under oath, Casey's trial won't start before May of 2011.

CASEY ANTHONY’S DEFENSE MISSES DEADLINE

Casey Anthony's defense team missed Monday’s deadline to provide its witness list to prosecutors for the murder case.

The judge had set a February 1 deadline for the defense to provide information or witnesses to back up its claim that it has proof someone else, other than Casey, put Caylee's body in the woods near her home last year.

The defense recently blamed prosecutors for the delay, claiming it still needs more information from the FBI.
source:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

A judge in the murder case against Casey Anthony sided with prosecutors, allowing them to delay the release of information to the public and her defense team.

Orange Circuit Court Judge Stan Strickland is giving prosecutors 30 days before the details will be made public. The information could be released earlier if the reason for the delay no longer exists, he wrote in his one-page order. He also is allowing the state to ask him for an extension if there is still a good cause for a delay.

It's unclear what information the state has. It's described in public court documents as "certain material and information" that have "come into the possession of law enforcement."

Prosecutors provided Strickland with a sealed request that explained why they needed the time.

Casey Anthony, 23, is charged with first-degree murder in the death of her daughter, Caylee Marie. Remains of the two-year-old were found on Dec. 11, 2008 in woods near her family home in east Orange County. The toddler was reported missing to authorities in July 2008 — a month after her mother claimed she last saw the child.

Officials ruled Caylee's death a homicide but could not determine her cause of death.

The state is seeking the death penalty against Casey Anthony, who remains in the Orange County Jail.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

All I know it has to be big in order for the Prosecutors with holding the information from the public. If KC was really innocent she would be screaming for a speedy trial. She is not going any where until the jury rules. Why would she be willing to wait in jail unless she is guilty as sin? If this was me I would want my day in court now not May 2011.

This is a very interesting analysis of just what the prosescution may have
that they want to remain sealed!

On February 3, 2010 Jeff Ashton, on behalf of the State of Florida, filed a motion requesting an incamera ex parte hearing with Judge Strickland concerning evidence they wanted permission to delay releasing. This request boils down to: the prosecution was asking to speak to the Judge, without defense counsel present, and under sealed transcript, so they could prove to the Judge there was a valid reason why they should be allowed to NOT give the discovery to the defense team as required under Florida criminal procedure rules.

Ultimately Judge Strickland ruled that the prosecution could not have their hearing, BUT could submit via sealed motion to him detailing their reason for requesting the delay in release. Judge Strickland apparently has received and reviewed that motion and ruled yesterday that the release of the discovery may be delayed for 30 days with the option for prosecution to submit via sealed motion for extension if they can still prove just cause.

Now, when the prosecution filed the original request for an incamera, ex parte hearing they stated unequivocally that what they are requesting a delay on DOES fall under the Florida criminal procedure rules for discovery. That means the moment they obtained the discovery they had 15 days to let the defense know of the new discovery and to “inspect, copy, test, and photograph” the information if it is “in the possession or control” of the state. This applies if it was new physical evidence discovered, the name of a new witness, or information provided by an informant.

So let’s see if we can apply some critical thinking and weed the chaff from the grain on what this could be.

The only things that are not subject to the rules of discovery under Florida criminal procedure rule 3.220 are:

3.220(g)(1) Work Product. Disclosure shall not be required of legal research or of records, correspondence, reports, or memoranda to the extent that they contain the opinions, theories, or conclusions of the prosecuting or defense attorney or members of their legal staffs.

3.220(g)(2) Informants. Disclosure of a confidential informant shall not be required unless the confidential informant is to be produced at a hearing or trial or a failure to disclose the informant’s identity will infringe the constitutional rights of the defendant.

So with the prosecution stating that what they have falls under the rules of discovery, we can rule out either of the above.

Note that the prosecution referenced, and Judge Strickland ruled to delay release based on 3.220(k). This paragraph states:

3.220(k) Court May Alter Times. The court may alter the times for compliance with any discovery under these rules on good cause shown.

To be clear, this paragraph supplies the authority to the court and provides the mechanism by which a party may request delay of release (i.e. the 15 days). It means nothing more than that. If a party has something that falls under the regulations of discovery and they have ANY reason to delay release, this paragraph gives them the means by which to request that delay, and gives the court the power to grant it if good cause is shown. Note that at the first of last year the defense team requested a delay in release of discovery on the basis it would tip the state to what Casey’s defense strategy would be. Judge Strickland ruled that was not “good cause”. Let’s face it, this isn’t a poker hand.

So, if you have SOMETHING that does not fall into 3.220(g)(1) or (2) listed above you have SOMETHING that falls under the rules of discovery. And you don’t get to “self rule” on it. If you believe you have a good reason to not release it under the rules of 3.220, you MUST go to the court and request that delay in the manner provided in 3.220(k).

If we go back through the rules of discovery in 3.220 we find that there is actually very few exemptions to the 15 day release. They are:

3.220(b)(2) If the court determines, in camera, that any police or investigative report contains irrelevant, sensitive information or information interrelated with other crimes or criminal activities and the disclosure of the contents of the police report may seriously impair law enforcement or jeopardize the investigation of those other crimes or activities, the court may prohibit or partially restrict the disclosure.

3.220(e) Restricting Disclosure. The court on its own initiative or on motion of counsel shall deny or partially restrict disclosures authorized by this rule if it finds there is a substantial risk to any person of physical harm, intimidation, bribery, economic reprisals, or unnecessary annoyance or embarrassment resulting from the disclosure, that outweighs any usefulness of the disclosure to either party.

So we can conclude at this point that this SOMETHING is not work product, not an informant and falls into either 3.220(b)(2) or 3.220(e). We are dealing with new evidence, information or a person who either has led to an investigation that is ongoing and the state feels would be jeopardized if released, or has created a situation where if the information is released it could lead to a substantial risk to a person of “physical harm, intimidation, bribery, economic reprisals, or unnecessary annoyance or embarrassment.” And whichever it was…the court agreed.

Common sense would tell us it most likely isn’t that they found Casey’s fingerprint on evidence they already had. Because they would not meet either of the requirements above to show just cause. In fact, I think Judge Strickland would slap them with a wet noodle if they requested withholding information like that. In addition, there is something else we can glean from what has happened so far. The Judge has taken the extraordinary step of sealing the written motion the state provided to him; meaning THE DEFENSE IS STILL CLUELESS as to the nature of this SOMETHING. The Judge has sealed the state’s argument until such time as whatever cause won the delay, exists no more.

It appears that this new information is either:

* new physical evidence that implicates a new person in either the commission of the original crime, the cover up of the crime, or some other form of obstruction of justice after the fact and the state is working to complete an investigation on this new person and this new crime (i.e. charge?), OR

* new evidence/information that has led the state into a new avenue of investigation against Casey Anthony and they are seeking information that could be destroyed if certain parties or the public became aware of it, leading them to take steps to preserve the evidence until they can obtain it, OR

* some one has come forward that the state is concerned if they release their name and/or statement will come under unacceptable stress of some sort that could be so egregious it OUTWEIGHS the usefulness of the defense being privy to the person’s statement.

Possibly one of the most intriguing phases of this case since Casey went cell-side.

SOURCE: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

If I read the above correctly, might it mean that someone, possibly a friend of Casey's, has turned evidence over to the defense that is very damaging?

That is what I was thinking Artgal...a friend or sibling?

I am so excited about this! Maybe somebody has finally remembered something or found something that will "seal the deal". I wish we knew what it was!!

I have been reading the Diane Fanning book and I am wondering if Casey possibly left Caylee with some guy she barely knew who physically and possibly sexually abused Caylee. Casey may have let on to someone this was taking place and had to "get rid of her" because she was "petrified" (HER word) of her Mother.

Trust me, I KNOW this sounds far fetched and is just a theory. I just keep thinking about the fact she left the house with Caylee and did not return. I have seen the last pics of Caylee and she did not look good.

Could someone have come forward?

There was a story in one of the tabloids that Casey confessed to where she buried Caylee after she was first put in jail to another inmate and that this was overheard by a guard who knew a girlfriend of Roy Kronks and that is how he knew the area of where Caylee's body was hidden. This story was referred to many months ago by Leonard Padilla on NG's show about a "daisy-chain" leading to Kronks awareness of the bodys remains. I dont believe this story, but I believe its a rumor that has been going around for almost a year now. I cannot believe that the prosecution would take such hear-say seriously so I dont think it has anything to do with this newly sealed evidence. But whatever it is, it has to be pretty strong for Strickland
to have agreed to seal it.

Wrap...I think KC did all the planning and executed the crime all by herself. And, I agree precious Caylee looked horrible in those last pics. But, I think her mother was neglecting her then.

We all know it's a fact that Casey was sleeping on anyone's couch or bed and was doing this BEFORE June 15th in spurts. So, I am just wondering if Casey hooked up with some idiot who abused Caylee. I know I probably sound like a nut case but it is NOT impossible, but maybe improbable.

All I DO know is that I have to agree that whatever is sealed Has to be extremely incriminating.

Yea, she was "dating" TL for those few weeks b4 the murder.
I know. I wonder what the evidence is. I have to read the judge's order again. I really don't understand it. :scratch:

A very thorough and informative post, Artgal.

LOVED reading all of the above and now I am so darn curious as to what they now have?

Great! Now I am going to be pondering this all day!

Huh, maybe Lee's Girldfriend Mallorie, or what ever her name was. Anyway, maybe they are split up now and she felt compelled to come forward with inside information she knows about from being around the Ants? :scratch: Just a thought is all!

Well whatever it is - when its released I have a feeling we will actually be able to say BOMBSHELL TONIGHT!

pondering, thinking, hmmmmm...What if the prosecution found Caylee's father? I know that would not be incriminating evidence about the murder, but wouldn't the prosecution have to disclose this info to the defense and with the sunshine laws, the public. Since the father/his family would be innocents in all this, I think the judge would agree to protect their privacy. The only thing is, I don't know how this info would be used by the prosecution at trial.....so I will keep pondering and thinking. :scratch:

Caylee's father! Wow that is an interesting thought!

OOOOOOhhh Artgal--now that would be something.

laga wrote:pondering, thinking, hmmmmm...What if the prosecution found Caylee's father? I know that would not be incriminating evidence about the murder, but wouldn't the prosecution have to disclose this info to the defense and with the sunshine laws, the public. Since the father/his family would be innocents in all this, I think the judge would agree to protect their privacy. The only thing is, I don't know how this info would be used by the prosecution at trial.....so I will keep pondering and thinking. :scratch:

From the very beginning, I have not understood how they could have been ignoring this issue and why they haven't investigated and proven who exactly was the father of Caylee. Even if the father died in an accident as KC says, certainly Caylee had a paternal family out there who should have known about her. If not, then it seems just like one more of KC's lies. She has never been pressured to disclose the father, the Ants never wondered about it?, and the cops seem to have ignored the issue. Maybe KC never really knew who the father was, but the state could have found this out by testing the possible mates. I do hope you are right, laga.

LAGA!! I really think you are on to something! That would make total and complete sense and would fit the criteria's above also, right?

I think from the moment Cindy Anthony laid eyes on Caylee she didnt want any interference from anyone else in raising her. We have been told the father died
but that was after Caylee was born. I dont know if
Cindy wanted anymore information regarding Caylee's father. I think she was glad that there wasnt a father in the picture. He would have been a nuisance to Cindy.

artgal16 wrote:I think from the moment Cindy Anthony laid eyes on Caylee she didnt want any interference from anyone else in raising her. We have been told the father died
but that was after Caylee was born. I dont know if
Cindy wanted anymore information regarding Caylee's father. I think she was glad that there wasnt a father in the picture. He would have been a nuisance to Cindy.

-----especially so if he had happened to be Hispanic, I might surmise.

Terry - that is really a good point - and I believe that the word was the he was Hispanic - I think his name
was Jesus, but I dont remember.

Interesting about Caylee's Father. At the time Caylee was conceived KC was working at Universal. So it could have been some random out of state visitor. In order to find out they would have to swab a lot of guys.

In the long run, whether it was the guy that died or
a one night stand - I dont believe there is relevancy
to the case. I do believe that someone has come forward that needs to be protected by the sealed order
and its one of Casey's friends that knows something
that never came out.

Yeah, Caylee's father is irrelevant at this point. And she just doesn't look Hispanic at all.

I am wondering if it is DC, that is being sealed. I think he has a lot to tell!

I should have known better than to jump on the bandwagon it could be Caylee Father coming forward. I am not sure anything is irrelevant regarding this case.

Oh no! I don't think that DC is the possible father. I just reread and hope it doesn't sound like that!
I think he knows more than what is out. He was poking there AND at the abandoned house, for something! Wonder if along with Momma doll, that abandoned house has stories to tell?

cherylz wrote:Yeah, Caylee's father is irrelevant at this point. And she just doesn't look Hispanic at all.

I am wondering if it is DC, that is being sealed. I think he has a lot to tell!

I was thinking it might be DC too! I hope whoever it is has something on Casey that will give her another anxiety attack just thinking about it!

Yeppers! The "not knowing" must be driving her nuts! Actually, more nuts!!

cherylz wrote:Yeppers! The "not knowing" must be driving her nuts! Actually, more nuts!!

:lol!: It is driving me nuts not knowing what the new damning evidence is.

I think he knows more than what is out. He was poking there AND at the abandoned house, for something! Wonder if along with Momma doll, that abandoned house has stories to tell?

Cheryz, I have always wondered about that abandoned house and how or what role it played if any in this case! We have all gone round and round about different theories as to how it or if it played a role. Now that we know more about the evidence, perhaps we can go over this once again ;)

You might only have to wait one month to find out.
If the prosecution can finish up whatever it needs to investigate or depose a witness, the Judge can give the order after 30 days if there is no more objection
from the prosecution that this information can be released.

I am thinking Padilla said he thinks the information is coming from somebody behind bars? I heard that on NG. Maybe I am hearing things?

jeanne1807 wrote:I am thinking Padilla said he thinks the information is coming from somebody behind bars? I heard that on NG. Maybe I am hearing things?

----No, you are not hearing things, jeanne, I heard him say it too.

I posted this up thread about the story LP was talking about on NG:
There was a story in one of the tabloids that Casey confessed to where she buried Caylee after she was first put in jail to another inmate and that this was overheard by a girlfriend of Roy Kronks and that is how he knew the area of where Caylee's body was hidden. This story was referred to many months ago by Leonard Padilla on NG's show about a "daisy-chain" leading to Kronks awareness of the bodys remains. I dont believe this story, but I believe its a rumor that has been going around for almost a year now. I cannot believe that the prosecution would take such hear-say seriously so I dont think it has anything to do with this newly sealed evidence. But whatever it is, it has to be pretty strong for Strickland to have agreed to seal it..

Apparently Roy Kronks girlfriend worked at the jail

I find it really hard to believe that IF Casey told anyone, and what she said was overheard by any jail staff, that what she said wouldn't have been reported to detectives working the case. Something about this jail house story just doesn't seem quite right. If it is true, and can be proven you know these people will face charges.

So thats what it is. I do remember some rumor. I too find it hard to imagine Casey trusting anybody. Biaz sure shut her up. Of course what can you say in her position?

Well I can see the prosecution using this because then they might say Kronk wanted the reward and didn't have anything to do with the murder?

Just guessing here.

Good point, artgal, it must be something different than this. It sounds like, whatever it is, will be of great importance.

I have been thinking about this a lot and honestly can think of only one thing that fits and that is my original thought, the prosecution discovered evidence of the idenity of Caylee's father/family. The prosecution is required to turn over all evidence that has been requested by the defense and any exculpatory evidence they discover. Since this evidence would not be exculpatory nor something to use against kc in the trial, but would fall under the defense request for prosecution evidence, the prosecution would have to make a motion as they have done. If this is indeed what the prosecution requested be sealed, it is a very admirable thing to do as it will protect an innocent and it would make no difference to their case to have it sealed, just an admirable, honorable thing to do.

PS My daughter, who has a law degree, thought the same thing when I requested her input...before I told her my thoughts....maybe it's just that we think alike but (?)she is an attorney. She told me a lot of legal stuff too I can't remember about requests and stuff.

mommyof3kids wrote:LOVED reading all of the above and now I am so darn curious as to what they now have?

Great! Now I am going to be pondering this all day!

Huh, maybe Lee's Girldfriend Mallorie, or what ever her name was. Anyway, maybe they are split up now and she felt compelled to come forward with inside information she knows about from being around the Ants? :scratch: Just a thought is all!

They are? Says who?? :lol!: :lol!:

Remember at another website, some of us old timers thought Lee might be the father? I was one of those that did NOT discount it.

I am wondering if the damning evidence has something to do with what was going on BEFORE those 31 days. I know I said this upthread but for almost 2 years (I believe) Casey was telling her parents and friends she worked at Universal Studios and had a nanny. My question: Where was she when she was suppose to be at work? Where was Caylee?

Two years is a long time to pretend you have a job. She was going somewhere everyday. Did she take Caylee with her or did she just drop her off with various people? If so, wouldn't those people have come forward?

Remember the talk that Casey was working for an escort service? Some have said they were using little Caylee, too. Her last pics show circles under her eyes. Poor baby!!

This is just a shot in the dark, but I wonder if the prosecution uncovered what Casey really was up to from basically 2006 to 2008.

You bring up an interesting theory to contemplate, those 2 years of pretending to have a job.

Myself, I keep having hunches about that new evidence being suppressed for 30 days and I keep thinking it is in forensics, either some new fact about the remains or some DNA found on the needle in the bottle and/or fingerprints. If that syringe in the bottle was taken out of someone's garbage, some innocent person who has to take home injections, then I would think that they would want to protect that person who had nothing to do with this crime. I keep thinking this way, but I am probably wrong.

I think DC may have told the..."truth" about why he was at the 2 sites probing. :shock:

I don't think the identity of the father would be something the prosecutors would wish to hold back as it would become public knowledge soon enough (they only got a 30 day hold) and it really would be meaningless to the case at this point. While it would protect the "john's" name for a short period, I don't think they would bother going through the hassle with motions knowing Baez would file a reply motion, etc.

I read somewhere that sometimes prosecutors ask to withhold info if it's linked to another on-going investigation and they don't want to interfere with it. Maybe they did find out KC was involved with the escort service and now they are trying to get evidence against the proprietors of that business. I did see a photo of someone who looked very much like KC looking into a mirror in quite a sexy pose. It wouldn't surprise me if she did sell herself. (although she surely didn't have any savings to show for it)

I think when KC pretended to go to work she just drove around long enough for her parents to leave for their jobs and then she went back home.

I ponder the jail guard leaking Caylee's location. Although I do believe it possible, I don't think anyone who knew where the remains were in August would wait until December to discover them. I think Kronk had a strong hunch which just wouldn't go away. If he knew for sure, he would have found them while the reward money was still in play. He's certainly not a rich man. But I do think Sindy knew by October and sent Dom Casey to verify it, hoping there was nothing left to use as evidence against NotMom.